LEPCs Find Assistance in Peer Program

By ANN-LOUISE TISDALE

On May 6, 1991 at 1:10 a.m., a massive chlorine leak from the Pioneer Chlor-AIkali Co. facility in Clark County, Nevada accidentally released approximately 60 tons of liquified chlorine into the atmosphere. The emergency incited over 300 responders from the region. Although this incident was one of the largest leaks in U.S. history, the overwhelming response demonstrated the communities' ability to effectively handle a major chemical emergency. The coordinated community response acted quickly and efficiently to the incident thanks in part, to the Local Emergency Planning Committee (LEPC) that coordinated emergency plans and communicated risk to the surrounding area. Incidents such as this demonstrate the need for local communities to plan for all chemical hazards and communicate risk to the public. To think that chemical emergencies cannot happen in one's backyard is an illusion. No one wants a chemical emergency to occur in their community, yet with proper planning and risk communication, as demonstrated by Clark County, even the most threatening situation can be handled successfully.

In Clark County, the LEPC's efforts did not stop with fulfilling the federal and state requirements of SARA: Title III, Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know. They continued to actively pursue different avenues to expand their LEPC capabilities, such as turning to the International City/County Manager's Association's (ICMA's) SARA: Title III Peer Exchange Program. On October 24, 1991, Clark County participated in the peer exchange with neighboring Mohave County, Arizona to discuss methods for maintaining effective LEPC organization and to address issues of concern for their counties involving SARA: Title III. Participants represented a wide range of public and private sector organizations and the enthusiasm demonstrated by those in attendance set the tone for future work activities in the individual counties. The peer exchange concluded with consensus by the participants to engage over the next year in mutually beneficial activities, Clark County and Mohave County will each send a representative to the other's LEPC meetings, they will exchange minutes of their LEPC meetings, and they will identify facilities along their common border that could be of concern to each other. The chlorine leak in Clark County along with the peer exchange provided impetus to review the emergency response plan as well as create a video for use in the public schools. The video, being produced in conjunction with the public broadcasting service, will serve to alert students and teachers to in-place sheltering for future accidents.

Private industry also got involved in emergency preparedness as a result of last May's events. Basic Management Incorporated, managers for the land on which Pioneer and other facilities sit, spearheaded a task force incorporating the managers of the plants and the Assistant County Manager from Clark County. The task force, in cooperation with the Chemical Manufacturer's Association's Community Awareness and Emergency Response (CAER) program, will produce a pamphlet, "What To Do In A Chemical Emergency" and will be available to the community for further risk communication.

Realizing the insurmountable task of the LEPCs, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has funded ICMA's Environmental Programs to match communities who need assistance with their SARA:

Title III challenges with peers who have successful programs. At no cost to the community, LEPCs are now invited to participate in peer exchanges in which leaders are provided with the advice they need from those who understand local environmental concerns best —their peers. By allowing LEPCs to seek assistance from other communities the peer exchanges can aid LEPCs in such areas as financing, risk communication, public notification, contingency planning, and other valuable areas of SARA Title III."

Taking advantage of ICMA's national network of governmental officials, LEPC members are able to meet for one or two days of on-site assistance. Participants are reimbursed up to $600 for travel and other expenses incurred during the peer exchange by ICMA. Through interaction among peers, the LEPCs create an informal setting to discuss the concerns in their specific areas. Topics vary between exchanges to produce the maximum benefit for all those involved. Previous topics have included: gaining public support for emergency planning initiatives, developing regional solutions, long range planning, creative financing, and self help options.

May 1992 / Illinois Municipal Review / Page 19

Since 1990, the SARA: Title III Peer Exchange Program has completed several successful exchanges. In an exchange between Gage County, Nebraska and Lewis and Clark County, Montana, Gene Seidel, Director, Gage County Civil Defense wrote, "The exchange program was needed and was a great help in addressing problem areas and providing information and ideas to improve emergency planning effectiveness." In the recent peer exchange between Clark County, Nevada and Mohave County, Arizona, Kathleen Shimmin, director of the EPA Region 9 Office of Health and Emergency Planning stated that the "... outcomes of the exchange were beyond expectations." Catheen Faulx, Emergency Management Coordinator for Clark County continued, "... the enthusiasm demonstrated by all in attendance set the tone for future work activities."

In this time of extreme budget reductions and limited resources, the need for information sharing is more important than ever. Peer exchanges uniquely address this situation by bringing LEPC members together to discuss areas of common concern. ICMA wants your community to be a part of the program. If your community has a successful Title III program or if it needs practical advice from an experienced LEPC, we want to hear from you. For more information please contact Sarith Guerra, Project Manager, at 202/962-3649 or write ICMA, Environmental Programs, Suite 500, 777 N. Capital St., N.E., Washington, D.C. 20002. •

Page 20 / Illinois Municipal Review / May 1992